Stop OpenOffice Renaissance project (petition)

[TheGurkha]

But like I said above, we do have threads here on this forum started by those who have fallen for these types of scam sites and who have lost money because of them. Not everyone is Internet-savvy. I know you have no connecdion with these sites, but you are unavoidably giving them an audience. Isn't there any other site you could host your petition on?

[Tommy]

i'm sorry about that, but the petition is already well known and promoted in various forums and blogs from that URL that it would be useless to switch to another one...

[Hagar Delest]

You fear that the few who have voted wouldn't vote again elsewhere? You don't want to increase the fuss about that petition when it would widen its spreading? Those who were not yet convinced that you are part of the scam plan now are.

Want to see a true petition? Look at that one: Say NO to the new MS Office OOXML format as ISO standard.

[Tommy]

@Hagar

so you are again insinuating i have direct connection and/or financial interest on the scam link of the petition i did not even started...
i can only laugh in front of those false accuses...

people can vote or not vote the petition without clicking any advertising link...
if someone is so imprudent to be fooled by them, it is likely to be fooled by other sites as well...
he or she doesn't need the petition to fall into scam links...

as i said, nobody who signed the petition protested about that (308 people right now...)...
the majority of users who are protesting are those who wouldn't sign the petition because they love Renaissance...
the "scam link" is just their polemic excuse to fight the success of the petition... they wanna create fear in people intersted in signing...

i can count only a few people (here and at Nabble forum) who were agree to the petition content but said they would not sign it becuase of the advertising links... i respect their decision but i think they could just sign the petition without clickin' on ads (just as i did) and/or sign it without giving their true email address if they are concerned about spam.

the problem, i think is that Renaissance-lovers are just hiding behing the "scam links"...
at first they labelled us, Renaissance-haters, as trolls, nay-sayers, ice-age users and other kinds of insults...
then they said the petition was useless... now they say thar the petition is just a mouse trap i made with Dingo-Dog just to steal some bucks to PC-newbies...

the truth is that Renaissance is turning into a big flop and many users are rebelling to this...
if you don't wanna count the petition results, count the ratio of postive/negative comments on GullFOSS, blogs and forums...
you won't like the results...

[Hagar Delest]

you won't like the results...

In fact, I absolutely don't care. As I somehow said in the other topic, I think that as soon as an UI is not adopted right away, it means that it's not the right one. So of course the prototype presented by Renaissance is not the good one. That's just obvious, no need to make a petition for that. But wanting to be rid of the whole Renaissance concept/project as a mean to improve the UI is simply ridiculous. So keep counting your voters, who cares?

The fact is that using a scam site is not very serious and sheds some discredit to the petition. If someone had really cared about voicing such an opinion, he would have set up a petition on a better site.

You should make a chart to count the votes vs time. I wonder what will be the trend of the line.

[Tommy]

you say you don't care about the petition but your animosity suggests the contrary...

say what you want, Hagar.... this is not gonna stop the petition.

the count is now 311 after 3 weeks

i'll alert you when signature number 400 will be added by the end of this week.

[Hagar Delest]

I don't care about the results of the petition because it's absolutely useless.

I do care because it's promoting scam links. That's all. I would care if I had been part of the Renaissance team. I think I would have given up trying to work on a new GUI and let the no-sayers take the lead to propose something else.

Don't forget to do the chart so that we see the trend.

[Tommy]

at this point is not very interesting and clear what do you care and what you don't care...
the important thing is that the petition is doing well.

so do you wanna a time chart? are u sure? you probably won't like the results...
but, wait a minute, you said you don't care about the results but now you wanna know the trend... kinda weird isn't it?

let me just say that approximatively in the last 24 hours the petition count passed from 308 to 326 which is a 5.8% increment in just one day...

you have to admit it... the petition is spreading and growing steadily!!!
we will probably break the 400 signatures wall very early.

[Villeroy]

All you do since 3 weeks is pushing up this completely pointless and redundant topic to the top of the list, over and over again.

All those "Open Office" sites pop up like mushrooms since they lost Google more or less. I don't believe anymore that you and your Dingo have nothing to do with those criminals. It is too obvious that pointless attention is all you are after.

Todays's topics from your victims:
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/ ... =5&t=22536
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/ ... =5&t=22542
Plus one email I answered because someone insists on having paid for the software and access to this forum.

I'm fed up with this and lock.

[Hagar Delest]

After discussion with the boards of Moderators and Volunteers, we have decided to keep this thread unlocked. Basically for freedom of speech and because nothing in the forum rules is against pointless topics.

However, the links to the sites will be deactivated (just plain text) because the forum doesn't promote the sites that are talked about here (but user will be able to copy and paste the link, so it will be a known action from him).

[Tommy]

i'm happy to see that the board reverted the locking of the topic made by Villeroy which IMHO looked more like a censorship act rather than a moderation activity.

i just wanna add that i've been accused without any proof to be linked economically with the scam sites...
morevoer Villeroy reported posts of people who fell into scam sites telling that they were "my own victims"...
that was false since those people visited scam sites which were not linked at all in the petition site...

sorry but i received very heavy accuses on this topic, and i could not defend becuase the topic was locked...
know that it has been reopened i have the chance to finally reply...

i will not talk again about this lock and i'll pass over it... this are misunderstandings taht may happen when the temperature of a discussion gets into boling zone...
however i will not tolerate anymore fraud accuses to my person.

you have the right to say that the petition is good/bad, useful/useless, intersting/boring etc. etc.
these are opinions and i will respect them... but please stop with personal attacks and false statements.

by the way the petition has never been so strong!!!
the siganture are growing as never they did before: we got a total of 392 signarues with a +130 increment in the last week.

i'll prepare soon the time/signatures chart that Hagar requested...
he will be surprised.


EDIT
401 signaures we broke the 400 wall!!!

[Hagar Delest]

sorry but i received very heavy accuses on this topic, and i could not defend becuase the topic was locked...

Then open a new topic in the Site Feedback section. No need to mix everything in this thread.

[Tommy]

no thanks Hagar, i won't open a new topic on the lock/unlock unpleasant episode.
what has been said has been said, what has been done has been done.
petition is now at 408 signatures and keeps growing, that's the only thing that counts for me.

[Bill]

..that's the only thing that counts for me.

No kidding? An online petition is like a poll with only one answer to choose from. I'd like to see is how many declined to sign after reading the petition. I'd also like to know how signatures are verified.

[Tommy]

you are free to consider the petition useless... it's just your personal opinion

however i wonder why you and others are so interested in commenting something you consider useless...

regarding the verified/unverifies signatures you were so curious about it, i'm sorry to inform you that there are only 37 unverified signatures among the 414 subscribers...

you may check by yourself on the "stop openoffice renaissance project" petition page.

[Bill]

The Petition Spot Terms of Service state that "...signatures on petitions posted on this site are not guaranteed to be legally valid signatures...", so what is a "verified" signature?

[TheGurkha]

however i wonder why you and others are so interested in commenting something you consider useless.

Personally, I was trying to explain things to you.

At the current rate, by the end of this year there will have been 100 million downloads of OOo since v. 3.0 was released. If only a half, or a quarter or even an eighth or a tenth are actually using it, what do your numbers represent?

But the point that you really don't seem to grasp is you're going to collect some number of signatures and say to the Dev's 'All these signatures say don't copy the ribbon', they'll say 'That's good, because we're not'. And then what?

[Villeroy]

And then what?

He attracted some additional interest for some criminals and this was my point when I locked this.
Judging by his attitude, I believe this is intended.

OOo and the whole community of volunteers around this forum, the other forum and the mailing list are serving as a pool of useful idiots.

[Hagar Delest]

The petition goes farer IMHO:

if you Agree with me (and many other) please sign petition, so we can stop OpenOffice renaissance (or middle age?) not useful project, and developpers can avoid to stress and go to solve issues

So it's not about copy or not a GUI, it's about throwing away the whole team so that they work on other problems. That's the problem with this petition, you can take it at 2 different levels. It has not been correctly worded or it has been so by design so that users think they cast a vote against the ribbon-like GUI whereas the target is against a team.

[BrJa]

...signatures on petitions posted on this site are not guaranteed to be legally valid signatures..

This is right but this applies to every online petition.
Or do you know a petition which really checks identity of the signing?
I think that this isn't technically possible.
It is possible generally to check only the validity of the e-mail address.
This applies to every online petition – AFAIK.

I had signed this petition at that time
http://www.noooxml.org/petition
The check of the identity happened in the same way as in the case of 'stoprenaissance'.
I had to confirm only the e-mail address which I had used.
Who I really am, this wasn't checked - because this isn't possible at all as I already said.

[squenson]

I think on-line petitions -- like any other petition on the market place in a sunny Saturday morning -- are fundamentally flawed. There should always be two choices, to sign for or against the question. Then, the difference of votes between the two columns would be really representative. It is very easy to do this on-line but I have never seen it because the initiator of a petition is usually against freedom of speech for his own petition.

Therefore, if you are honest, please always count ONE LESS vote for your petition against Renaissance project, mine.

[Dingo-Dog]

let's make a simple syllogism together

if people hates Ribbon
and Renaissance is a clone of Ribbon
then people hates Renaissance

So, no wonder if people hates Renaissance, an attempt to port Ribbon on OpenOffice, milion of users are against Ribbon-Renaissance, only users agreeing with Ribbon-Renaissance have interest to say I agree (developers, Micro$oft agit-prop, and so on...)

People, in fact, want work with software not only look, and say " O MY GOD WHAT A BLINKING AND SPARKLING GUI!" and then suddenly quit

Ribbonizing attempts makes OpenOffice unusable (and unuseful), causes lose of productivity and interaction and destroy customization facilities. If developers love OpenOffice, why then try to destroy it? One thing is sure, Micro3$oft would be happy of Ribbonification of OpenOffice, this say all

WORDS, WORDS, WORDS... and meanwhile bugs, important bugs remain not fixed to play with Ribbon

[squenson]

let's make a simple syllogism together
if people hates Ribbon
and Renaissance is a clone of Ribbon
then people hates Renaissance

Read carefully the first word of your syllogism: IF. This is a fairly strong assumption to think that people hate Ribbon: some people like it, some don't. So the people who hate the ribbon in MS Office may hate the ribbon in OOo and those who like it in MS Office may like it as well in OOo.

[Bill]

Micro3$oft would be happy of Ribbonification of OpenOffice, this say all

Ha! Microsoft is supporting the ill-defined anti-Renaissance movement by advertising placed on the petition page. Oh, I forgot, we're supposed to ignore the advertising.

[Tommy]

is it so difficult to accept that there is a lot of people who don't like Renaissance?

it is so difficult to accept that 421 people signed a petition against it?

[TheGurkha]

Is it so hard to see that a petition is not the right way to do this? You are perfectly entitled and actively encouraged to engage with the teams who work within OOo, whether it is documentation, development, user experience or whatever. It allows you to interact directly with the people you need to try to influence - and it costs you nothing.

[Tommy]

I've already made my proposals on GullFOSS (keep standard GUI as an option etc. etc.).

if they accept it i will stop promoting the petition.

new updated count is 425

[Hagar Delest]

Please all, I propose to stop posting in this thread. It is clear that the only purpose of Tommy is to keep this topic alive by replying to posts without any constructive behavior (he merely counts the votes).

Don't participate here to what he's doing in the user mailing list (I hadn't checked it in a week and it's disastrous). At least his name will be associated for years with the mess he has created.

All has been said already. I know we all want to defend our positions. But what's really the point now???

That's my last post in this topic of course, whatever the next attack will be.

[Bill]

I've already made my proposals on GullFOSS (keep standard GUI as an option etc. etc.).

if they accept it i will stop promoting the petition.

new updated count is 425

The truth will out. No wonder I've had the feeling that I was talking to a fence post. This has been a bigger waste of time than dealing with spam.

[Tommy]

Bill, if u don't believe me take some time to read my many posts on GullFOSS Renaissance feedback page. that Tommy is it me.
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/pro ... _interface

or are you just accusing me without any proof?

regarding the waste of time, i did not force you to enter this thread...
you did it all by yourself

P.S. petition count updated: 428


@Hagar
do you really pretend me not even to reply to all your critics and accuses?
this thread has been kept alive mainly by other users like VIlleroy, Gurkha, Bill etc. etc.
i just replied to them. if you count comments you will find only 10 posts from me in the last 30... the other 20 come from other OOoCF users including you.
do you wanna a time/post chart for this?